Is Alan Richardson doing a good job?

[skeptic]

We're into his second season, I think by now it's at least fair to say that we're beginning to see the direction he's wanting to take us in... what do people think?

Strengths?
Weaknesses?
Game plan?
Is he doing a good job building the team?

Do we think he'll be around in 3 years?

[Sainternist]

He hasn't been able to prove himself yet. He has one of the weakest lists in the comp. From what I gather he has a fair vision of where he wants to take us. So far, he has seemed very realistic about how long it will take us to become more competitive. Certainly the win at Gold Coast is a sign of competence on his behalf. I like his level-headed approach. He seems very pragmatic. I'm yet to see him make any really bad coaching moves over the course of a match, but maybe it is hard for him to do that at this stage, considering how outmatched we have been against most clubs thus far into his tenure.

I, for one, hope he will be still around in three years time. It would make me sick to the stomach to see another coach last a very short time. Fingers crossed he isn't a fall guy or doesn't lose the faith of the players.

At this stage, I'm giving him a pass on his report card. He is a brave man to take on the responsibility.

[gringo]

I'm not sure that there is anyway to measure until he is given a competitive team on a regular basis. Last week he was a gun, this week is a dim witted idiot. Ask me when we beat Carlton and I will love him again. Anyway the guys who ride the bad times rarely last and we don't like long tenures. I see Robert Harvey taking over in 2 years only to get sacked 4 weeks later when we reinstate Malcolm Blight on a 2 billion dollar contract, who will attend training sessions via video link from a psychiatric unit dressed in nothing but a tin foil hat and oven mitts. It's our way nothing can change it.

[dragit]

I'm not sure that there is anyway to measure until he is given a competitive team on a regular basis. Last week he was a gun, this week is a dim witted idiot. Ask me when we beat Carlton and I will love him again. Anyway the guys who ride the bad times rarely last and we don't like long tenures. I see Robert Harvey taking over in 2 years only to get sacked 4 weeks later when we reinstate Malcolm Blight on a 2 billion dollar contract, who will attend training sessions via video link from a psychiatric unit dressed in nothing but a tin foil hat and oven mitts. It's our way nothing can change it.

Lol, sounds about right, though I was hoping we can get Micky Malthouse back at the club too.

[Jacks Back]

Thompson hasn't got a gig at the moment.

But seriously, I think he's doing the best anyone can do. I, for one, certainly hope he is around for another 3 years or even 8 years as that would mean we have become successful again and hopefully get that 2nd (and 3rd) holy grail.

[borderbarry]

If he finishes next season he would have done three years, and we should be on the improve by then. If not, well we may look elsewhere.

[RODOS]

no scandals, playing the kids, appear to be developing, level head with the media, gaining sponsors, older players on board (tough gig with a rebuild), and more than anything, the team clearly plays for him. Not always, but that's to be expected.

Dunno if he's a good tactician yet, but I'm enjoying our game plan, hopefully we'll end up like port but with a better forward line

Family member plays for port, said the boys were all pretty upset he left, much loved and respected coach.

[plugger66]

I reckon it is impossible to know at this stage. I think a poor coach could make a good side average. I think a poor coach can make a bad side bad and I think a good coach can do bugger all to a bad side. The only thing I do know that even if AR can coach but we finish right near the bottom again next year then he likely wont be there. Our list was really bad when he took over so its very hard to see if he can coach or not. We will know more at the end of the season but still may not know enough. He should get all of his 3 years no matter how we are go this year unlike SW who seemed to be a cancer of the club and had to go. No leaks AR is like that.

[Bluthy]

I think Richo has been brilliant so far in really tough circumstances. He comes across as a Rock of Gibraltar which the players will pick up during these years where they are losing a lot of games and not always playing well. He seems a real "dad" type, tough but honest, which is important for young players to get encouragement to develop and take the game on and know exactly where they are. My worry is he might slide a bit into conservatism with player selection and game plan. He's got to remember its his job to get games into young players despite the pain and losses. That's why I liked Pelchen there as a bit of a yin/yang thing happening. Maybe they miss that at Port where Hinkley was the more bolder and pushing hard and Richo the common sense anchor for players.

I do wonder what would happen if Clarkson became available in a few years having achieved so much at Hawks and looking for a fresh challenge.

[bergholt]

If he finishes next season he would have done three years, and we should be on the improve by then. If not, well we may look elsewhere.

I think that's probably about right. If we get flogged a bunch of times towards the end of 2016 then he'll be up against it. In the other hand, if we finish it a bit like 2003 then he'll be the messiah. Most likely the last five rounds of 2016 contain a couple of OK wins but also a few disappointing losses and that makes the decision a coin toss.

[plugger66]

I think Richo has been brilliant so far in really tough circumstances. He comes across as a Rock of Gibraltar which the players will pick up during these years where they are losing a lot of games and not always playing well. He seems a real "dad" type, tough but honest, which is important for young players to get encouragement to develop and take the game on and know exactly where they are. My worry is he might slide a bit into conservatism with player selection and game plan. He's got to remember its his job to get games into young players despite the pain and losses. That's why I liked Pelchen there as a bit of a yin/yang thing happening. Maybe they miss that at Port where Hinkley was the more bolder and pushing hard and Richo the common sense anchor for players.

I do wonder what would happen if Clarkson became available in a few years having achieved so much at Hawks and looking for a fresh challenge.

Pelchen should and hopefull never had any imput into selection. If he did then he needed to be told to get out or get out of the club. We have plenty of coaches to make sure the right side is picked. That certainly hasn't been an issue so far. Got to get a balance of young and old.

[bigcarl]

I thought GT was a complete spud for the first few years of his tenure. Then we jumped out of the blocks in 2004 and won 10 in a row. So it's too early to tell as the list is at a similar stage to 2001-2002. I see some encouraging signs, but time will tell

[saintspremiers]

I thought GT was a complete spud for the first few years of his tenure. Then we jumped out of the blocks in 2004 and won 10 in a row. So it's too early to tell as the list is at a similar stage to 2001-2002. I see some encouraging signs, but time will tell

This will be our third consecutive year as a bottom-feeder club.

2000 to 2002 were our three years back then before the rise in 2003. Can't see us winning 10 games in 2016 though - it's really up to FA to speed things up come 2017 onwards.

[spert]

Seems like a nice bloke, but I get the feeling he is one of those guys who is an excellent assistant coach in many areas but not necessarily a great senior coach, as I think they're a different animal altogether. I would be disappointed in this his second season, not see more wins over last season. I don't think he has the tactical strengths I would like to see, especially defensive and midfield structures and systems.
I don't consider Collingwood to be a 12 goal better side than us at this stage of the season, so AR needs to figure out quickly why his planning and preparation for that game went so wrong to the point of being totally uncompetitive for three quarters of the game.

[Moods]

I'm always curious when ppl compare where we are at now to where we were back in 2000-2002. For mine, the comparison is irrelevant. We were fortunate enough to get some good experienced players from other clubs back then (Hamill and Gehrig) At the moment all we have done is lose experienced players (BJ and Dal) I think if we are to be realistic the rebuild will take longer this time around. Not all clubs suddenly come on with a burst like we did and Port did a couple of years ago. Carlton have been re building for nearly 10 years. They have had early draft picks in Gibbs, Murphy, Kruezer and Walker and they hav e barely got past the first week of the finals, when they made it.

What I did like Friday night in the first quarter was the fact that we appeared to be playing on at all costs AND we were attacking the centre corridor. It cost us at least one goal (Scneid's centring the ball and it got intercepted) but I like the fact that the boys are taking the game on. This is how we will improve. Also the week before against GC, watching from home it appeared our defensive structures were far more stable. Players had positioned themselves in space in the first half especially, so that every time the GC got the ball we were in a position to tackle. Looked far more coherent than a bunch of blokes trying their arse off, but running around like headless chooks. Of course with a young team the system breaks down with fatigue and lack of concentration, but I have been seeing good signs.

For mine - he's doing a good job, so far.

[The Redeemer]

I reckon it is impossible to know at this stage. I think a poor coach could make a good side average. I think a poor coach can make a bad side bad and I think a good coach can do bugger all to a bad side. The only thing I do know that even if AR can coach but we finish right near the bottom again next year then he likely wont be there. Our list was really bad when he took over so its very hard to see if he can coach or not. We will know more at the end of the season but still may not know enough. He should get all of his 3 years no matter how we are go this year unlike SW who seemed to be a cancer of the club and had to go. No leaks AR is like that.

I am more of a five-year plan sort of character.

With a bunch of normal kids, some promising, some good, some not so flash, it is impossible to tell at this stage.

We all need to give it time, absurd the losses and see what comes from 17 onwards.

[Bunk_Moreland]

Seems to be a good development coach.

Have no idea if he can coach a competent consistent top eight team though.

[scallopsroe]

I think it was Yabby Jeans who has been credited with the expression "Good players make good coaches". Richo has inherited a poor and ageing list. His real input into recruiting didn't occur until the 2014 draft. In addition there has been several changes to the assistant coaching team, this all part of a footy teams evolution and development as they strive for the extra improvement.
He made gutsy career move to come to the Saints. My only gripe to date with Richo and the coaching staff is that we seem to fall for the trap of playing only one ruck man and that is a young learning ruck man, in most games. I don't subscribe to that coaching strategy which probably puts me off side with some reviewers on this site, every good team goes into a game with two ruck men not a ruck man and a tall forward as a back up, observe the Hawks and Freo at the weekend, seemed to work well with their strategy. A side needs flexibility and the chance to get first use at clearances, this has been major problem with the Saints for a couple of years and could explain why we can get slaughtered on the spread such as Friday night. It's how modern footy is played at all levels. I'll see how we go in Wellington on Saturday, am looking forward to a better four quarter effort in N.Z. and will be cheering loudly from Aisle 28.

[Legendary]

Most people who comment publicly seem to rank Richardson as one of the top 3 development coaches in the league (including assistants etc.)

We are in a development phase for at least the next two years, so in my mind we need a top development coach in place. We seem to have that.

In my opinion, Richardson's crunch year is 2017 - not 2016.

Unless we recruit some outstanding free agents at the end of this year, I expect 2016 to be similarly tough on a win-loss basis, albeit with more games in which we are competitive for longer.

Trying to implement a complicated or ultra-defensive game plan doesn't work when you've got a bunch of young kids (inexperience, lack of fitness, lack of composure to execute etc.), so I don't think we can judge Richo on that aspect of performance at this stage of his senior coaching career.

Sometimes people can't see the forest for the trees when they are judging a coach's performance.

Case in point is Matthew Knights: he is still the most successful Essendon coach (in terms of finals performance) since Sheedy.

In my mind, there are three phases for a coach:
- Development, bottom 4 (St Kilda)
- Transition to finals, finishing 7th to 11th (Richmond/Western Bulldogs)
- Consistent top four side (Hawthorn, Fremantle, Sydney)

In my opinion, Richo at least deserves a crack at the "transition to finals" phase" - which I hope will begin for us in 2017 if we recruit some outstanding free agent midfielders. Some coaches fail at this hurdle, others can haul their side up.

Richo has the players and administration on his side though - and Neil Balme, Brian Cook and Frank Costa still say that this is the single most important aspect of rebuilding a club, to have everyone supportive of each other and on the same page.

[SydneySainter]

I still think Richardson is pretty lucky to be getting so much benefit of the doubt, when everyone was sharpening their knives for Watters after one season in the bottom four.

He has had some good wins to his short tenure so far, but plenty of diabolical losses also.

Given our current roster, can't think of a coach who could do any better, so give him the three years, but I think it's a fair expectation that our win-loss ratio be on steady incline by then.

[FQF]

It's impossible to know for sure but I believe the signs are good. Compare his results to those of Paul Roos' at Melbourne - a universally respected coach with a similar list who is having similar results.

I think that next year we need to give him a 1 year extension so that he doesn't start coaching for his career and sacrificing development. By the end of 2017 we will be in a position to know whether he deserves to be their for the next phase.

[Pleasing]

So far he has been excellent.
- He has set realistic expectations
- He has rewarded young players showing form
- He has significantly improved the morale of the playing list
- He never confuses the message to players and supporters
- He doesn't show anger frustration is always level headed and fair
- He is prepared to engage with supporters and share what he can
- He doesn't mess around with the gameplan but stays consistent each week and quarter to quarter. He never floods or plays to minimise a loss, he is prepared to lose big as long as we keep trying to play the right way. Important in this development stage.
- He doesn't chop and change at the selection table no one gets banished after one bad game.
- He doesn't appear to play favorites with the group
- He makes players earn their spot based on set benchmarks of fitness and defensive discipline

The next test will come when the list is good enough to start challenging, in my opinion that won't be 2016, if everything continues as is this year we should extend him at the end of this year till 2017. Last thing we want is the pressure of keeping his job forcing him to chase short term wins at the expense of the long term vision. We still have to ride the bumps of Riewoldts retirement, that will throw a speed bump in our rate of improvement, look at Brisbane without Brown this year.

[tony74]

Seems like a nice bloke, but I get the feeling he is one of those guys who is an excellent assistant coach in many areas but not necessarily a great senior coach, as I think they're a different animal altogether. I would be disappointed in this his second season, not see more wins over last season. I don't think he has the tactical strengths I would like to see, especially defensive and midfield structures and systems.
I don't consider Collingwood to be a 12 goal better side than us at this stage of the season, so AR needs to figure out quickly why his planning and preparation for that game went so wrong to the point of being totally uncompetitive for three quarters of the game.

There were reasons. Few of the boys were pretty crook after the game. Bruce had been unwell leading up to the game and on reflection shouldn't have played. And of course Roo. And Collingwood aren't that bad.

[saintspremiers]

As Richo is a development coach, we also need to look at Sandy and how they operate as part of the
judgement call.

Going down to Sandy on Sunday, the whole outfit looked and felt very slick - not quite AFL level but not far behind.

In order to develop the kids successfully, the grassroots at TBBO need to closely mimick what happens at Seaford.

[loris]

There were reasons. Few of the boys were pretty crook after the game. Bruce had been unwell leading up to the game and on reflection shouldn't have played. And of course Roo. And Collingwood aren't that bad.

Was Newnes crook tony74? Watching and listening to him on the video interview after the game on the Saints.com site Newnes (his voice) sounded very much like a person suffering from a cold or virus.